If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Now this is more like it. 11.9@124 in the 1/4 mile? 0-60 in 3.7 seconds? 0-100 in 8 flat? That's very impressive for a 4395 pound sedan. We know the 552 crank horsepower rating from BMW is underrated for the S63TU V8 and it certainly shows here. What is odd though is that the M6 Gran Coupe is heavier than the F10 M5 (weighed at 4315 pounds) yet is running quicker and faster 1/4 mile times. If anything, the F10 M5 being almost 100 pounds lighter should put the M5 close to 125 mile per hour trap speeds and 11.8 in the 1/4 mile stock.

As more numbers come in from magazines and owners alike we will get a better idea but it is safe to say the M5 and M6 Gran Coupe are 11 second capable cars in stock form at over 120 miles per hour (without the optional Competition Package that adds an additional 15 horsepower). The lighter F13 M6 coupe should be able to do even better than the four doors. Definitely impressive performance especially considering how heavy these cars are.

I wonder if there is a noticeable different in weight distribution between the gran coupe and the M5. Perhaps the M6 grand coupe as a more optimal weight distribution for launching? More weight equals more traction the tires can provide, but also more traction required to move the additional mass. They are both so damn heavy already that a few hundred pounds in the right place could help to dial in the launch/weight transfer. Doesn't explain the trap speed though....more questions than answers here.

Car and Driver did a C63 coupe (with P31) test about a year ago and they both ran similar 0-60 in 3.7 seconds. The C63 went 0-100 in 8.6 while this did it in 8.0 that means from 60-100mph the M6 made up .6 seconds thats just ridiculous ! Shows that even at a blazing 3.7 0-60 traction is still limiting its real potential. 124 mph trap speed is ridiculous for a small yacht

Honestly out of all the new turbo motors anybody with driving knowledge would consider the powerband of the s63tu to be superior to the m157. The m157 is just a sledgehammer of torque but has a low redline and looks like it flatlines to redline. The s63tu would be more preferrable for me it has an almost N/A like powerband just on steroids. Good torque from down low and holds it well to 7200 rpm which is great for a factory turbo V8. Somebody needs to really open the ECU and crank the boost on this motor id love to have a reason to get a white M6 coupe

@Sticky @DFM if you read the article it says this m6 gran coupe tested was equipped with the carbon ceramic brakes that reduce unsprung rotational mass by 43 pounds which is HUGE! Im surprised its not a bigger difference but than the extra body weight of the gran coupe negated some of that rotational mass loss

Car and Driver did a C63 coupe (with P31) test about a year ago and they both ran similar 0-60 in 3.7 seconds. The C63 went 0-100 in 8.6 while this did it in 8.0 that means from 60-100mph the M6 made up .6 seconds thats just ridiculous ! Shows that even at a blazing 3.7 0-60 traction is still limiting its real potential. 124 mph trap speed is ridiculous for a small yacht

Exactly seems once this thing is moving the power takes over.

But why did we see a C63 P31 pull an F10 M5? There doesn't seem to be consistency.

@Sticky @DFM if you read the article it says this m6 gran coupe tested was equipped with the carbon ceramic brakes that reduce unsprung rotational mass by 43 pounds which is HUGE! Im surprised its not a bigger difference but than the extra body weight of the gran coupe negated some of that rotational mass loss

That's a very good point. It still seems like either M6, the coupe or the four door, it just performing better than the M5 for whatever reason.

But why did we see a C63 P31 pull an F10 M5? There doesn't seem to be consistency.

Doesnt really make sense at all ! The C63 pulled it on the top end to where the power of the f10 should take over. Their might be some truth to the whole heat soak theory on the s63tu .. I raced and beat a f10 m5 with my C63 but i have headers and a few silly things so it doesnt count ;p I also raced a stock P31 C63 Coupe last week and put a hurting on it seemed like i was walking it MUCH harder than the f10 m5 i ran

Seeing as how the motor is prone to heat soak (dyno proven) we cant fairly compare it to other cars when the numbers get close. someone needs to do back to back to back 1/4 miles runs with an S63 powered car to really test this theory. a dyno is one thing but when there is air moving over the heat exchangers who knows.

Seeing as how the motor is prone to heat soak (dyno proven) we cant fairly compare it to other cars when the numbers get close. someone needs to do back to back to back 1/4 miles runs with an S63 powered car to really test this theory. a dyno is one thing but when there is air moving over the heat exchangers who knows.

Also, has an F10/13 been run on drag slicks yet?

Haven't seen anyone on drag rubber yet. Should be capable of mid 11's I would think...

Read somewhere this S6344Tu is putting out around 660-hp. I cannot recall where I read it, as that may lend validation to what I said. With the F06 M6 Gran Coupe being the top of the M cars, it very likely it is more powerful and better balanced than the F10 M5.

They are just saying it has 560-hp. For M, that is just the minimum the engine makes. Stated by the head of M GmbH, so they really worked some "black magic" on the chassis and engine. And in this day of heightened cultural differences, I can say black magic because I am black. That is a joke.

This is a continuing trend, I see. Every test I see puts the M6 GC ahead of the M5 by a not-insignificant margin, and I can't help but think maybe they give these engines a little extra love. I don't know. Either that or, like it was said above, maybe the weight distribution is just more favorable for launches. It's been said before that they tuned the systems of the car specifically to be more sporty than the M5, I'm thinking mostly this might be a result of that.